Question to Glenn S regarding AT units

[Volcano Man]

Well, someone at one time made the suggestion that all AT guns (not HAA guns) be allowed to move one hex at the expense of all its MPs. It is a pretty good idea, imagine what the defender could do it he could fall his AT guns back under cover of other units, to set up secondary lines. Or, he could pull them back (again, under cover of other units) and then next turn put them in T mode to fall back rapidly. IMO moving while not in T mode does not necessarily mean the guns are being man handled (we don't know what they are doing at this scale), I would like to think that they are limbering up in their tactical formation and just moving rearward a little bit, which of course would take a lot of time because they would be moving very slowly.

Oh well, as Glenn said, if someone wants that -- bring it up at Tillercon (for those able to attend of course). That is the best way to make the idea known and put it forth to a discussion. :)

---

I entered the last reply in error.

Sorry Ed, I cannot see what "this scale" has to do with it, you are either in Tmode or they are being manhandled. That being the case, 1 KM is a long looooong way to haul a gun and ammo.

No, it is a matter of interpretation. This is a pseudo-operational level game of sorts, one that resides in the middle of something like Squad Battles and something like the TWE series. We don't really know what the heck is going on down there "on the field", we just have the general knowledge that a higher commander has access to. The importance of Travel Mode is that it is a strategic mode of movement, both formation wise and as a general method of movement (ie. to utilize road networks, column formation, traveling movement techniques). My point about the scale is, that everything in PzC is *abstract* when it needs to be, because it is a pseudo-operational level game. And that is actually the beauty of the series and what has allowed it to be successful with rule tweaks; this allows a large amount of freedom. So, a unit in T mode is in column formation using roads sure, but allowing a unit to move one hex out of T mode doesn't necessarily mean that they *are all being manhandled*, they could be quickly limbered up and displace *tactically*. At this scale everything is not black and white, for a tactical game like Squad Battles sure, it has to be black and white because it is such a small scale.

But really, I don't care if anyone wants that rule or not, it is not like I am crying for it myself, my point was that it was a reasonable rule suggestion from the past and it could be justified if it was added out of necessity, since we can justify just about anything a game at this scale, as long as it produces realistic results in the long run. And isn't that the problem we have here? Which is more realistic at the operational level: AT units that are rooted in a hex and die all the time because they cannot withdraw because in order to do so they must exercise strategic movement, or AT guns that have the capability of displacing tactically? I would say the latter, otherwise "they" would of had penal unit personnel manning every AT gun. The fact of the matter is, AT units as they are largely turn out to be a one shot asset, something you commit to some place once, and then leave behind when you have to fall back because they are going to die anyway. But that is just my opinion on the matter. Again, the point is people can suggest what they want at Tillercon. ;)

---

///////////////////////////////////

One more thing, everyone tends to think in a limited scope on such things. Lets take the approach that everything is black and white in PzC for a moment. I mean, I agree that allowing AT guns to move away one hex may make them too powerful and nearly impossible to eliminate. Ok, no problem, so lets say that an AT gun unit that is in Travel Mode is always limbered up, and an AT gun unit that is not in Travel Mode is not. Within those limitations a suggested rule could be:

Allow AT gun and HAA units (which cannot normally move when not in T mode) to move one hex at the expense of 1/3 of their MPs for entering travel mode, then an additional amount of MPs expended for the terrain in the hex that they enter, at which time they are automatically put in T mode in the hex they move to.

A bit of rather crappy pseudo code to maybe illustrate it more clearly:

Code:

{
if (AT_gun || HAA_gun unit is only capable of moving in Travel_Mode && unit is currently not in Travel_Mode && user attempts to move the unit to an adjacent hex)
     {
     put said unit into Travel_Mode;
     subtract 1/3 of said units Movement_Points;
     subtract the cost of the terrain that said unit moved into;
     }
}

This would then allow them to move away on a road and disengage, albeit not very far. It would essentially be a method to allow such units to withdraw tactically by avoiding the devastating opportunity fire which currently prevents withdrawing from being a viable option. The devastation of AT gun units caught in T mode could still be an option as well, since it would depend on the terrain and where the defender positioned their guns. If a defender's AT/HAA guns are not located near a road, and he is attempting to displace up hill and through a forest, then chances are they will only make it once hex, and the attacker will be able to put direct and indirect fire on the visible unit (up hill) on the attacker's turn. Some of the guns may get away, maybe not. However, a situation where the defender positions these units near roads with quick lines of egress available, then the defender could fall back, and then be on a road to move away.

Oh well, there are hundreds of other potential ways to address the issue I am sure, everyone just has to open their minds... ;)